Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
YAY HUMANS !!!! (Yes, that's snark.)
Saturday, February 14, 2015 2:03 AM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 8:30 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Saturday, February 14, 2015 9:18 AM
WHOZIT
Saturday, February 14, 2015 9:39 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: The study is based on current increasing rate of rising emissions of carbon dioxide and complex simulations run by 17 different computer models, which generally agreed on the outcome, Cook said.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:33 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Quote:The computer models need to demonstrate that there can still be winter blizzards in the same years as droughts and summer heat waves.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:55 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Because WHOZIT and RAPPY both suffer from the same problem (are an in fact probably the same person): They mistake their own backyard for "the world". Quote:The computer models need to demonstrate that there can still be winter blizzards in the same years as droughts and summer heat waves. But they do. Some people will NEVER be convinced by facts! Never, ever, ever. There seems to be an exceptionally high number of those on this board. -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 12:45 PM
Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:09 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "The computer models need to demonstrate that there can still be winter blizzards in the same years as droughts and summer heat waves." As Signy said - they do. But the major reality people can't seem to wrap their heads around is that you can have blizzard events in an area - and still have an average year because those events are compensated for in the average by weeks of slightly higher than average temperatures that no one remarks on. And you can have cooler weather in one area and have that cooler weather more than compensated for by very very hot weather elsewhere - say Australia - that no one notices. And despite those very local, temporary events like blizzards you can still end up with the hottest GLOBAL year on record to date. Things like 'highest global average temperature to date' are facts, not models, that people deny. And when people deny facts, what do you do then? Models only take facts and try to forecast the future. Facts are tangible - but people like rappy and the zit (and probably the people you know in Texas) don't accept them. That's an insurmountable barrier to rationality.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:21 PM
Saturday, February 14, 2015 2:01 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Because WHOZIT and RAPPY both suffer from the same problem (are an in fact probably the same person): They mistake their own backyard for "the world". Quote:The computer models need to demonstrate that there can still be winter blizzards in the same years as droughts and summer heat waves. But they do. Some people will NEVER be convinced by facts! Never, ever, ever. There seems to be an exceptionally high number of those on this board.
Saturday, February 14, 2015 2:10 PM
Saturday, February 14, 2015 3:35 PM
Saturday, February 14, 2015 5:42 PM
Saturday, February 14, 2015 6:30 PM
MAGONSDAUGHTER
Saturday, February 14, 2015 6:55 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: And? Does that change the extent or depth of the drought? Or are you such a numbnuts you can't understand that the measure of the drought is irrespective of how many people are affected by it?
Saturday, February 14, 2015 6:58 PM
Sunday, February 15, 2015 7:57 AM
Sunday, February 15, 2015 8:34 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: I said nothing of the sorts, but I suppose, any guy around you would have numb nuts.
Sunday, February 15, 2015 8:48 AM
Sunday, February 15, 2015 11:07 AM
Sunday, February 15, 2015 11:25 AM
REAVERFAN
Quote:Originally posted by Magonsdaughter: Just pay off that old Robber Baron Murdoch to get his corrupt network to change its stance on climate change and the simpletons of this world who can't understand basic science will come around. Easy.
Sunday, February 15, 2015 12:25 PM
Quote:A quality control procedure is performed that uses trimmed means and standard deviations in comparison with surrounding stations to identify suspects (> 3.5 standard deviations away from the mean) and outliers (> 5.0 standard deviations). Until recently these suspects and outliers were hand-verified with the original records. However, with the development at the NCDC of more sophisticated QC procedures this has been found to be unnecessary.
Quote:Next, the temperature data are adjusted for the time-of-observation bias (Karl, et al. 1986) which occurs when observing times are changed from midnight to some time earlier in the day.
Quote:Temperature data at stations that have the Maximum/Minimum Temperature System (MMTS) are adjusted for the bias introduced when the liquid-in-glass thermometers were replaced with the MMTS (Quayle, et al. 1991). The TOB debiased data are input into the MMTS program and is the second adjustment. The MMTS program debiases the data obtained from stations with MMTS sensors. The NWS has replaced a majority of the liquid-in-glass thermometers in wooden Cotton-Region shelters with thermistor based maximum-minimum temperature systems (MMTS) housed in smaller plastic shelters.
Quote:The homogeneity adjustment scheme described in Karl and Williams (1987) is performed using the station history metadata file to account for time series discontinuities due to random station moves and other station changes.
Quote:First, how much difference does the manufactured warming in the Southern Hemisphere make? As a practical matter, not very much. The impact on global land air temperature series like CRUTEM4 is muted by the fact that less than a third of the Earth’s land area is in the Southern Hemisphere, so the impact on the global land surface temperature record would be only in the 0.1X degrees C range even if the amount of warming over the Southern Hemisphere landmasses had been artificially doubled. And the impact on “surface temperature” series like HadCRUT4, which are about 70% based on SSTs, would be down in the 0.0X degrees C range. So removing the homogeneity adjustments doesn’t make global warming go away.
Quote:Estimates for missing data are provided using a procedure similar to that used in the homogeneity adjustment scheme in step three.
Quote:The final adjustment is for an urban warming bias which uses the regression approach outlined in Karl, et al. (1988). The result of this adjustment is the "final" version of the data.
Sunday, February 15, 2015 3:58 PM
Sunday, February 15, 2015 5:20 PM
Monday, February 16, 2015 12:20 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: So to get back to the question of what would it take for people to give credit to the idea of global warming ... Second posits it would take better models.
Quote:Before the 2007 crash, I consulted for a company that made software that helped banks analyze risk. I can hear your hollow laughter right now. Bank risk software guy, you had one job. Actually, the software did work really well. The problem was, nobody bought it. It seemed like a no brainer; at the time, heads of risk in banks simply waited for their counterparts around the world to email them a spreadsheet, then stitched them together. The process took hours, and the information was a day or more out of date. Our product oversaw every deal made by every trader and gave a real-time assessment of the dangers involved. In spite of its brilliance, nobody was interested. When we talked to the heads of risk at investment banks, we found out why. They’d spent years learning how to glue all the data together, and had developed a lot of secret Excel wizardry to do so. They were dammed if they were going to give it all up for a dashboard that any fool could read.
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: I pointed out above, people don't even accept the data, which are facts, based on measurements, and (theoretically) not subject to ideology.
Monday, February 16, 2015 3:58 PM
Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: As far as I know AURaptor and Whozit are in love with petroleum, smearing it all over their bodies. Forget about convincing those two. But there are others who have enough mind that they can change it.
Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:58 AM
Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:23 PM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:59 PM
Friday, February 20, 2015 1:17 AM
Friday, February 20, 2015 2:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: And, unlike the US, at least China has a plan to actively address global warming. http://www.c2es.org/international/key-country-policies/china
Friday, February 20, 2015 4:51 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Rappy can't seem to decide if there is "no" global warming, or -if there is- that it's not man-made.
Quote: Clearly, the conclusion that is driving him is the vast concern that something "might be done" which affects his lifestyle, his pocketbook, or both, because he really has no interest in the evidence or the logic (or the lack) on how he reaches his pre-determined conclusion.
Quote: "His mind is made up, don't confuse him with the facts." An old saying from even before when I was a kid, which just goes to show that belief-based people have existed for a long time!
Saturday, February 21, 2015 1:17 AM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL